News on USMC TA

Good news for our Marines! Today we received word that Marine Corps Tuition Assistance Program has been restored to the previous TA levels (undergraduate $250/semester hour; fiscal year max of $4500). The only exception is the $350/SH for graduate level courses will be reduced to $250 SH. As always, please contact your admissions or financial aid representative to discuss how this may affect your benefits, or speak with your ESO.

I'm glad they are keeping it. As long as we can afford it. I would rather see TA cut than to lose good Marines or not get a new service pistol, etc. Cuts are coming to the military, as they should, hopefully we're all ready for it.

I seriously cannot believe how long the Beretta has stuck around, especially with some of the more modern designs.

BTW, there is absolutely nothing wrong with the 9mm as a cartridge, the problem is the fact that the military insists on using ball ammo. With modern defensive ammo, the difference between a 9mm and a .45 is negligible - shot placement is much more of a factor.

The Geneva Convention requires that only ball ammunition be used during warfare which means a small and smooth copper-jacketed 9mm (9×19mm Parabellum) round traveling at a blistering 1,200 fps will likely pass completely through a target depositing a big portion of its energy into whatever happens to be behind it. The bigger .45 ACP round traveling at slower speeds (appx. 830 ft/sec with most FMJ 230-gr. bullets when fired from a 5" barrel) may be more likely to stop inside the target where it expends more of its destructive energy.

Bottom-line, bullets are simply delivery tools of destructive kinetic energy. Kinetic energy is governed by two variables, mass and velocity under the equation KE = ½mv2. But the terms do not drive energy equally. Double the mass of a bullet and energy doubles. But double the velocity of the round and energy quadruples as an exponential function. This is the crux of the small-and-fast versus big-and-slow argument. Of course Beretta’s 15 round magazine size vs. the Colt M1911A1’s 7 round magazine capacity is likely a military decision factor, and FMJ (Ball) ammo usually feeds smoother than say hollow point ammo and is cheaper to manufacture. Add that the 9mm is a NATO standard round. Both cartridges have been around for some time: The 9mm Parabellum /Luger since 1902 and the 45 ACP designed by John Browning in 1904.

I'm not sure on the Geneva Conventions restrictions on ammunitions types? You might be thinking of the Hague Convention instead that restricts the use of expanding bullets on personnel. But that does not apply things like shotguns or any of the heavy machineguns that I used.

FWIW - In 3/4's run up to Bahgdad we used HEIAP (.50 cal Armor Piercing Incendiary Tracer ammo)rounds on personnel along with the HEDP from the MK-19. Eventually the sound of the Duece or MK-19 could scatter the bad guys. Funny how word gets out

I'm not sure on the Geneva Conventions restrictions on ammunitions types? You might be thinking of the Hague Convention instead that restricts the use of expanding bullets on personnel. But that does not apply things like shotguns or any of the heavy machineguns that I used.

FWIW - In 3/4's run up to Bahgdad we used HEIAP (.50 cal Armor Piercing Incendiary Tracer ammo)rounds on personnel along with the HEDP from the MK-19. Eventually the sound of the Duece or MK-19 could scatter the bad guys. Funny how word gets out

Click to expand...

Cory,

You’re correct, my bad; it’s been some time since active duty days. As a logistics issue, troops in Vietnam were [told] as a rule of engagement to only shoot equipment with a .50 cal as it was wasteful to engage personnel with it. At that point in time, the 7.62mm M60 MG (replaced by the M240) was much more appropriate (much lighter, easier to resupply, etc.), e.g., an Economy of Force issue (?). And of course the M2 Browning (Ma Deuce) .50 caliber was /is used against whatever or whomever. Nonetheless, the M2 BMG is a true bad-guy attention getter …

I am aware of the restrictions by convention. Seems kinda silly to me to prohibit small arms hollow points, but things like CBUs, JDAMs, etc. are the norm, not to mention the rounds mentioned by Cory for MGs. I would rather be shot by 9mm with a hollow point than by a MK19 - just saying.

Yes sir, I was not calling you out. We got a pretty good brief from the Gunner and our BN GySgt (who, BTW was Jack Coughlin the author of this Sniper book) on ROE before the invasion. Plus, one of the first things they teach at Division Machinegun school in CAMPEN is that the old wives tale about not being able to use .50 on personnel is BS.

Also sir, I was told by a friend of mine from 3/4 that when he did his next deployment (with 1/5) they had the SLAP rounds for use. By then our CAAT teams were up-armored and the war had changed significantly.

Truckie - I'd take the 9mm as well. The MK-19 might not leave much left for Mortuary Affairs to clean up.

Sorry for the thread derail. Glad my fellow Belleau Woodsmen are still getting some military tuition assistance.

So the SpecOps folks are getting a sweet .45 1911? Where's mine? The reason, and this is the LCpl highway talking, for the adoption of the 9mm Beretta was because people with smaller hands were having problems firing the old service pistols. Obvioulsy the SpecOps community will not have this problem due to their exclusivity.

The only pistol I currently own is this one for me and my boys to shoot. Lots of fun, cheap ammo but the kick from its short barrel is quite a bit for my 7 year old. He still loves it

hi, he got a pretty good brief from the Gunner and our on ROE before the invasion. Plus, one of the first things they teach at Division Machinegun school in CAMPEN is that the old wives tale about not being able to use .50 on personnel is BS. they good to hear that that problem is going away